tv [untitled] February 11, 2011 9:30am-10:00am PST
it has really been troubling to see the decrease. go solar, the program should be funded as much as possible, understanding that we are saddling with our budget this year. i am supportive of that. i would love to hear from other commissioners if they feel is a good use. and we're fortunate enough to have them. >> one other point of clarification. whee recommended be funded at $2 million, we recommended that there be a split between the funding available for low-
income and nonprofit vs. the rest of the program participants. we recommended that $2 million be set aside for low-income and non-profit and $1 million be available to the remaining participants. thank you. >> afternoon, commissioners. i like to speak to you about the reorganization of the real estate services. real estate services was assigned to me to take a close look at what functions were there, what were the capabilities? in the future, we will have much more complex types of negotiations in real estate services.
i might point out there is a memo, and we do kind of clothes and some recent -- close some recent audits. they did not properly managed their leases. they did not adequately prepare annual rent paid in do. we had a number of different properties, about 420. we currently have negotiations ongoing for treasure island and hunters point. we are not really real estate issues, but there is a question that always comes up.
we do it through the mayor's office, so there is a complex negotiation that goes on. again, it involves some conflict in the negotiations. we have numerous property acquisitions. some of these will be very complex and negotiations and the sales that are not something we have handled in the past. we are looking at and what our real capabilities are in carrying out these things. we have a lot of contracts that we have managed as part of the lease agreement. a lot of you are responding looking at what the auditor says that trying to upgrade those for the future.
the water system improvement program has done a lot of work on the right of way clearance. in the future, we want to know how we will keep those clear. and we will start to overlay those with the complex land management policy that we will bring you in the very near future. these are the kind of things that we will see happen in the future. what we need to upgrade in the real estate services, they are more in line with other departments that have gone through the same sort of analysis and organize there is to be focused on the particular enterprises. i would be glad to answer any questions you might have. commissioner courtney: i am looking at the memorandum i have received, and i believe there
were some representatives from local 21. and the employees that were currently in the organizational chart, the job descriptions who were proposed to be in the organizational chart. can you give me some understanding or clarity about what the distinguishing features are between those that are currently employed and those that are proposed to be employed? >> we have the job descriptions attached to the memo. it functions very independently. these are people that function either as the apartments or deputy directors. we substitute those out to be that new manager.
the panel of analysts, they are very much experts and contract management and financial analysis. we don't see it in real property officers. i don't know if i was included in your packet. but it is not functioning at this high-level. as far as overseeing some of the real-estate functions. we are looking at people that have that expertise. where are not talking about issuing permits for simple leases. we're talking about a master development leases. are we are talking about a lot of things that might be coming that way.
for example, [unintelligible] but i think what we are looking for is somebody out with more analytical skills. we looked at the airport again, they have moved towards these more higher level analyst class'es. commissioner courtney: with respect to the chain of command, the proposed manager position will report to the general manager. and reported where? >> prior to the organization that we had in april of 2010 last year, it was reporting to the manager of the external
affairs. since that time, it has been reporting to me. commissioner courtney: i'll tread lightly here. the record indicates there are capacity issues. are there capacity issues with respect to the employees, or with respect to the classification numbers? the record to me indicates that there are concerns with the current staff. is that ok? with performance in terms of the audit. >> the simple answer is, if there are performance issues, those are handled through evaluation and corrective behavior. those would not be public discussion.
we believe that there is a general upgrade of the classification and it does not have to do with the individuals. >> with respect to the employees, those that are currently reporting to the manager, i assume those are represented by local 21? maybe this is a better question for counsel, but have we have entered into negotiations or collective bargaining discussions about the proposed reorganizations? do we believe that we are required to do so?
>> there would be discussion between the city attorney because the office, -- the city attorney's office. it would be further review by the reputation process. >> there is a lot of history. my understanding is there is not a need to negotiate over these changes. maybe a fine line. i think that is the typical way the city attorney defines it. before changes actually occurred, and there might need to be a discussion.
it is my understanding of the rule. >> with respect to the impact, it seems to me that it is indicated that the employees and those current positions are not simply offered in the event they meet minimum qualifications. they are offered an opportunity to reapply. >> that is correct. >> my question is, are we of the opinion moving forward that we are not obligated to meet and c onfer with the bargaining unit rep? >> at some point, but at what
point? there is no requirement to do it at this point in the budget process. president vietor: and does that answer your question, commissioner? >> it does. president vietor: commissioner torres? other commissioners? >> those are the outstanding issues unless there are other issues. i know there are people here with public comment on these items. >> just to be a bit organized about this, i think we should take these items in order. we are at item number seven, i believe.
we have capital plan, financial plan, wholesale water rates. >> hugh ten is just -- item ten is just calling for a hearing. president vietor: then we can take itenms seven through nine. and ten after . items seven through nine, public comment? >> we have a number of speaker cards. if the other speakers could line up behind said there is not much delay. >> and i am the general manager
at crystal springs golf course. i have a letter here to the commission that i would like to read if possible. the purpose of this letter is to acquaint you with our perspective on performance of the real-estate department. in the 14 years we have been your golf course. we believe crystal springs is far and away the strongest revenue producer in the city. in 2010, we produced a financial loss, but the city received $1.6 million in grants. it might also be seen in how it projects the community values. crystal is operated according to
a broad principles and hiring benefits. there is a prevailing wage and a minority contractor iting. and highly evolved environmental sensitivity. it is due to a commonly effective private partnership. we work with 17 municipalities and public agencies. we have experienced and suffered the effectiveness of contract administration. the sfpuc is a shining example of cooperation and results. it guarantees against the kind of decline and so, and at other
city-owned golf courses. it firmly express's and applies the values of the city that owns crystal springs. we have received prompt and helpful feedback on issues that are either acquired or could benefit from input from the sfpuc as landlord. we may not be privy to all the facts, but we would be remiss in informing how helpful the real- estate department has been. this includes maximizing revenue to the city. while further in the environmental and social goals important to the city. hope you have further questions, do not hesitate to contact me.
[chime] >> i don't understand the purpose of your presentation. >> he wanted to show his support for the real-estate department and how effectively have worked with them in the last 14 years. i'm not sure what mr. isaac intended. >> your employer is opposed to the reorganization? the purpose of your presentation is to support the real estate department. president vietor: thank you. >> that begs the question, what is the rationale for the
reorganization? can we talk about that? >> we have tried this -- to stay in the public record. talking about the deficiencies in administration, but what i think he was talking about was that we are also involved in the other real estate transactions. we end up having to have other people work on them. on treasure island, hunters point, on the larger ones, we had somebody that was an attorney and an 0941 manager. >> and that is public information, correct? >> and the fact that we have had to bring in other people.
>> you have no audits or concerns? thank you. president vietor: next speaker, please. >> mr. kelly. >> i'm just speaking highly of what i have had with the real estate department. they are very professional in running a horse ranch. still the same, they are a great group to work with. >> where is your horse ranch? hong san mateo. president vietor: hanthank you r your comment. next speaker, please.
welcome back. >> i have a prepared something. good afternoon president and commission members. i am the president of the board of the nonprofit skyline stables. when we have been your tenants for over 60 years. we negotiated an agreement in good faith to make way for the water systems improvement project at our old home. we have vacated our barns and the horses are scattered liberally throughout the country now. our group is prepared to invest a considerable amount of time, effort, money, and hope to build our stable on another location. this has been a very long struggle for us and we are tremendously concerned that the sfpuc might consider the idea of
removing the present real-estate division. this department oversees a huge amount of property. he each of these has a unique history with your organization. the real-estate department has extensive historical knowledge of the properties and the people associated with them. it was impressive to see how far back our association with your present real-estate sacco's. if this is an irreplaceable investment of time, it will not save money. it will create chaos and in sufficiency -- insufficiency. perhaps it will make clear the money you have saved over the years. the offer continuity in a bureaucracy that is completely subject to a change in personnel.
you cannot replace their knowledge. it is simply impossible to manage all of these affectively. in your proposed budget introduction is out reach and invest in people and communities. removing a department that has been actively serving the community for decades completely negates these goals. i said that you might be asked to consider and goals that might directly affect our future. please consider our willingness to work with you and include the real estate division in your future. it will greatly benefit both of our organizations. president vietor: think you for your comments. -- thank you for your comments. >> mr. miller.
>> good afternoon, commissioners. i represent verizon wireless. i am speaking specifically to two leases we have. our comment is that we have worked with puc for a long time. our experience is they have been professional with us. while wewe would encourage you o seriously consider whether or not changes are warranted. it generates income for the city, and we want to be on the record in that regard. >> the next speaker is mr. weaver.
>> president, chairman birds, i am the district office chief of the department of transportation. we oppose the proposed reorganization. our work load have peaks and valleys. >> the department of transportation where? >> california department of transportation. >> you are the -- opposed to the reorganization. i have never heard that happen before i will tell you why. we deal with hundreds of jobs. >> you are authorized to be here on -- as a representative of the state government. >> my boss knows i am here. parks as the director know you are here? -- >> as the director know you are here? >> no.
my department works extensively securing permanence from road widening to maintenance to eastmaement, and we oppose gettg rid of an entire apartment. we do not get rid of are generalists -- our generalist spirit and we keep them to issue permits back-and-forth with agencies. >> so i could complain about van ness ave, because that is under your jurisdiction? i can come to your director and complain? >> you are welcome to come to me and complain.
>> i have never seen this happen before. thank you, sir. >> next speaker please. >> sorry, my reading abilities. >> good afternoon, commissioners. the last time i had the pleasure of seeing you was in my territory, and it was a great today when you pass the environmental justice legislation, so thank you for that. after looking through the budget document that was on line, i noticed in the budget proposal
-- >> please continue. >> there was a change in the structure of the real-estate department, and as a community member and a tenant of the southeast greenhouses, i was a bit concerned. i do not pretend to know the difference between one manager and another, but it seemed implied there were going to be some personnel changes, and in the 10 men if i have -- the 10 years i have been working with your department, i have not experienced any of the troubles i've just heard happened, and looking at the plans, it is thrilling to see the concentrated efforts and the focus you are making on the communities benefit, but i am
nervous that without a brain trust, it sounds like the implied personnel changes are more than implied, and i'd like to urge you to consider the history and understanding this current administration has developed with the gave you and southeast community. -- bayview and southeast community. perhaps training would be in order, but i am proud of what they have done for the community and for us. >> thank you for your comments.
>> hi, commissioners. we have a lease for you, and we have had one for many years. we are in the process of selling part of the property. part of the property is also a public street, and the dealings and have had have been very professional, and i can ditto most of the speakers. everything we have had has been very professional, and it's downright scares us to see this project handed off to somebody that does not understand what is going on,